Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1887-06-04


arbitrary and usurping, as the Socialist
and Anarchist delight to declare, is with
out the shadow of foundation. But the
doctrine is preached, and the apostles OF
destruction are not without followers. 1t
ought to be duty self-imposed upon every
good citizen to use his best powers to eradi-
cate from the public mind the tares the
Anarchists, Socialists and revolutionists
SOW. We are aware that the mass of clear
thinking Americans do not estimate the
teachings of the classes referred to as
greatly menacing to free government. But
it is none the less duty to eradicate the
false doctrine, however feeble its present
influence. The vicious and false take root
in any soil; where they flourish the nu-
tritive and good wither and fail They
are the weeds that, if neglected, grow
rapidly and smother the good grain.
So far as these general propositions are
concerned, the essayist will have the con-
currence of the thoughtful. He enters
wholly different ground, however, when he
insists that the need is for more govern
ment in its primary sense. He holds that
instead of fearing strength in government,
we should encourage the disposition of law
to enter the social realm as regulating
power to secure more equal distribution of
wealth; encourage it to grapple with the
questions of underpaid labor, groveling
drudgery, wasted strength, misery and
squalor" that, he holds, would beprevented
by a just distribution of the products of
labor" That government does not do
these things he believes is due to the senti-
ment that interference is invasion of hui
man rights. Government protection is his
remedy for all the "evils." He would
have it invade the social sphere, to the
extent of protecting "the victims of in
equality"
The illogical character of the conclusion
reached is apparent. If government by
the people is best that governs least, and
where there is least need, it is difficult to
understand how free government is to be
perpetuated if it enters the arena Of pri-
vate affairs, and undertakes to secure that
for the man which his own energy and in
dustry have failed to provide for him.
Government is to see to it that none are
debarred of their rights, but it never en-
tered into the primary scheme Of govern
ment that it is to guarantee to men that
which, in free competition with their fell
lows, they have failed to secure Govern
mental interference in this respect, as in
most others, destroys selfhelpfulness and
eliminates personal energy from human
character.
Says the essayist: Primitive govern
ment. when brute force was employed, was
strong enough to secure the just and equit-
able distribution of wealth" 1t is because
We have passed from and above the realm
of brute force in government that it is
now no longer deemed governmental
function to supplement human thrift
lessness by the arm of authority, or to en-
courage, as all governmental interference
of the character indicated does, idleness
and decay of ambition.
The weak, when bolstered up, will more
need the helping process. To protect
them against invasion of their rights is
one thing. to lessen the effort of one to add
to the capacity of another is a very differ
ent thing. Paternalism ends when the
youth is deemed strong enough to battle
in the world for himself Why in govern
ment should it forever underlie the gov
erned?
Professor Ward advises workers to keep
in view that the government is their own,
and that they have the right to make it
the creature of their will and secure pro-
lection through it, There is vagueness as
to what is meant by protection" in this
statement, but it is clear enough that the,
essayist loses sight of the fact that his ad-
vice points directly to class government,
which earlier in the paper he deprecates;
and that he ignores wholly the equal right
of those who have, as well as those who
have not, to make the government the
creature of their will.
Every scheme to compel the surrender
inI,r,J,,al 1,ln,fr- =, L
it passes the need to protect the members
of society from encroachment by each
other upon the natural rights of each
other. 1t has not yet, nor do we believe
it ever will be demonstrated, that general
good Will be conduced by any governmental
attempts 10 narrow the capacity of any man
to acquire, or to employ his energies in
any direction he chooses, so long as he
does not prevent another from doing like
wise. The idea is erroneous that mere
possession of much by one and little by
another indicates like inequality to en-
Joy, or inequality of rights under the gov
eminent, or enlargement of human liberty
on the one hand and restriction of it on
the other. Yet upon this false idea all
soeialistic schemes move.
''No system that can be devised will
make the necessaries of life more abund-
ant" said DIR. Newcombe; "all that could
be done would be to allow some classes to
consume more and others fewer commodi-
ties" An error underlying Prof Wards
monograph is that the condition of the
working people is so grievous, In fact,
they have advanced more than any others
in the enjoyment of the comforts Of life,
and have and do enjoy precisely the same
to augment and multiply
them as do all others.
The essayist likewise ignores the fact
that labor is but one of the factors Of pro-
duction, and that human progress links
to genius, invention, brain, capacity to
manage, organize and lead. He like
wise loses sight of the principle that all
governmental interference can go only to
the oxtent nf crinnliuer industrial ao+;r;tx-